MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321372579 · doi:10.3390/life13020576

Designing a Novel Monitoring Approach for the Effects of Space Travel on Astronauts’ Health

2023· article· en· W4321372579 on OpenAlexafffund
Anurag Sakharkar, Jian Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueLife · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsComputer scienceSpace (punctuation)AstrobiologyRemote sensingBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Space exploration and extraterrestrial civilization have fascinated humankind since the earliest days of human history. It was only in the last century that humankind finally began taking significant steps towards these goals by sending astronauts into space, landing on the moon, and building the International Space Station. However, space voyage is very challenging and dangerous, and astronauts are under constant space radiation and microgravity. It has been shown that astronauts are at a high risk of developing a broad range of diseases/disorders. Thus, it is critical to develop a rapid and effective assay to monitor astronauts' health in space. In this study, gene expression and correlation patterns were analyzed for 10 astronauts (8 male and 2 female) using the publicly available microarray dataset E-GEOD-74708. We identified 218 differentially expressed genes between In-flight and Pre-flight and noticed that space travel decreased genome regulation and gene correlations across the entire genome, as well as individual signaling pathways. Furthermore, we systematically developed a shortlist of 32 genes that could be used to monitor astronauts' health during space travel. Further studies, including microgravity experiments, are warranted to optimize and validate the proposed assay.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLifeSame topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207